68 comments:

It's killing itself in a bout of creative destruction. The old Fox represented the "Establishment" right. The new Fox? Perhaps the new nationalist populist vanguard. America's existent (vice mythical) Middle Class. The one that "works" for a living.

Maybe, but haven't you noticed that FOX has been moving ever-so-slowly-but-relentlessly toward the LEFT for the past four or five years at least?

Do you BELIEVE the trumpeted brouhaha about Sexual Harassment?

Do you believe ANY of the ostensble reasons given for the departure of so many of FOX's mainstay employees?

How do you explain the sudden rise of Tucker Carlson, a decent, clean-cut guy, but he has the VOICE and hyper-emotional DEMEANOR of a prototypical PIPSQUEAK?

Power chick Megyn Kelly, whom I, personally, came to find odious, was far more masculine in her pointedly aggressive, decidedly UN-feminine manner than Tucker, who one was made to look weak and ineffectual when placed opposite the formidable Super-Butch Rachel Maddow back when Tucker had a job at MSNBC.

If by "The Corporate Right" you mean the Internationalists who favor One World Government, I would agree that's cause for alarm. Internationalism is a BIG threat both to the sovereignty and ujique cultural identity of the various nations.

In the case of Globalism "IN UNITY THERE WILL BE –– NOT STRENGTH –– BUT DESPOTISM."

Centralized Power –– of ANY kind –– is THE Greatest Threat to Liberty ever.

But would mighty CHINA want to cede her sovereignty to a Central World Government where she would be considered no more significant than some little tinpot African or shabby Caribbean Island dictatorship?

Apparently Megan Kelly has no problem using Howard Stern and a raunchy interview with him as a stepping stone in advancing her career. There's something off about her as evidenced by her overly nuanced questions to Donald Trump during what was supposed to be a Presidential debate.

Her questions seemed too contrived.

But FoxNews is being run by Prince AllaWeed from beautiful downtown Riyadh, I think, anyway. Must be Ruper Murdoch's way of saying thank you to Bill O'Reilly and the gang.

Evidence: Sure. O'Reilly was fired. And it's pressure applied directly to a most sensitive spot advertising on his show. Somebody know who and where to go to egt things done their way. Glenn Beck also had the same methods applied, likely by the same people.

I don't consider myself a big supporter of Bill O'Reilly although I watched his show fairly frequently over the years. I read a few of his books which I found reached conclusions that should have been in line with "accepted thinking" though not necessarily with the truth. So he wasn't exactly rocking the boat there with his books, although there were widely read. The books did not exactly arrive at any disturbing conclusion that would earn him the hatred of his enemies.

Perhaps his mission was to "debunk" the biggest conspiracy theories although some of the bigger and more recent ones seemed to be off limits.

Of course, it's easy enough to understand that O'Reilly would have "raised the hackles" of the progressive condescender contingent that would be applauding his demise on FoxNews.

Maybe it all comes down to keeping his zipper zipped in our current PC times.

He had an overbearing, bullying personality, and he was incredibly rude to his guests, yes, but he ALSO told the truth most of the time, and stood for what was right about truly IMPORTANT matters like ridding us permanently of Criminal Illegal Aliens, taking a very tough stance against those who harm children, and had, I believe, an intelligent understanding what was really going in in the world. Like him personally or not, he and Roger Ailes MADE Fox News the force for good it was for a long time.

And what was that, you ask?

FIX News was the first and ONE and ONLY TV News outfit that gave the public any alternative to the TOTALLY LEFT-LEANING narrative of the ENEMEDIA.

Whether this was done our of sincerity or because of a cynical determination to make money doesn't matter. The point is they DID it.

Last night I realized what a void has been created with OReilly´s exit. I turned on FOX as usual and could listen to the mindless Perrino for about 2 minutes, tops. "The Factor" logo sans O´Reilly´s name underscored that not only is he gone, but his No-Spin Zone vanished as well. {{{ POOF! }}} Just like that, done in by a targeted smear campaign of old news, suddenly revived.

I felt isolated.

I could not find news about the Paris attack on ANY of the other so-called news channels. I KNOW O´Reilly would´ve mentioned it.

Anderson Cooper was blathering on about Trump´s inability to keep his promises. And that idiot on MSNBC whose claim to fame is that his father COULD be Frank Sinatra was carrying on about how there MUST be a Chaffetz scandal about to break.

There´s a huge danger here and it has nothing to do with whether or not you liked O´Reilly. This was an orchestrated campaign to remove him by reviving harassment stories from 6-11 YEARS ago. They resurfaced NOW for a reason.

Rush, Hannity, Levin, Savage and even Tucker Carlson will be next. We will have no place to go, and that is the point of it all.

Until WE learn to organize, until we learn to participate aggressively in "advertiser education campaigns" we will continue to enable the radical left. They will take down what little network we have and spoon feed us only the news THEY determine we should know. This is scary stuff.

Further proof the MSM and the Dims have nothing to bolster their party... only to try to destroy anyone that is perceived as either powerful or possibly effective at exposing them for what they are. (Flynn, Sessions, Nunes to name a few that come to mind recently)

The notches in the belt are mounting. When are we going to start to fight back? FNC needs O´Reilly more than O´Reilly needs FNC. Im not a huge fan, but I hate liberal groups that get away with these destructive tactics.

It´s a shame O´Reilly should have learned his lesson from the first scandal. Better to shut it down now because the media would continue picking and picking. Hard to defend. My fear is the two liberal sons of FOX Rupert Murdoch Heckle & Jeckle are going to morph FOX into another liberal TV Station. Hannity watch your back.

In other words, Winston, you BELIEVE the allegations against O'Reilly and Ailes?

You're correct in your assessment of the eneedia's scurrilous methodology, but that in ITSELF, bolster MY believe that there is little or nothing to this claptrap but exaggerated, hyper-inflated allegations with no phyiscal evidence to back them up. It was the same kind of crap they tried to pull on Donald Trump to derail his campaign.

Also, this Lisa Bloom bitch just happens to be GLORIA ALLRED'S DAUGHTER. That ALONE ought to disqyalify her from ever being taken seriously by ANYONE in matters of this kind.

Lke mother like daughter, I'm sure.

Frankly, I'm amazed that a raging virago like Gloria Allred could even HAVE a daughter. I always assumed she must have been born with RAZOR BLADES strategically positioned between her legs.

The very thought of anti-feminne bitches of this vile a caliber makes my flesh crawl.

FT, they had taped telephone conversations that caused O'Reilly and FOX enough grief to put up millions in settlement money.

But I don't understand your logic here.

You really think O'Reilly is a class act?

I've read about Ailes, who is a complete psychopath, and though I wouldn't be surprised if the allegations against him were true, even if it was just Ailes being Ailes and throwing out the old ladies for new gams on the set, he certainly had it coming. Working for Ailes you were selling your soul, or were loony like him, or both. It's not easy to get the grease of FOX News off your resume. That's why Kelly split when she did. She knew exactly what she was doing when she confronted Trump in that debate. And she probably knew full well it meant she'd be leaving FOX.

I am not a O'Reilly fan but we have lost all sense of reason. In an interview with a part time Fox employee she said O'Reilly told her she looked hot and that was sexual harassment. Getting a BJ by an intern is sexual harassment but saying a women looked hot, really. This sounds like extortion coming after the fact. We are so PC that you can't say anything to the opposite sex for fear of reprisals. As to the telephone conversations, you can hang up. Touching or using your position to gain favors is sexual harassment, saying you look hot is a compliment. What would she have done had he have said, you look horrible.

BTW, I think O'Reilly and Hannity are two of the talking heads on TV. They only care to give their opinions and seldom listen to their guests. Tucker is a goof and they can do better.

"Taped conversations," bound to embarrass both O'Reilly AND the organization that employed him, Jersey?

Well, BRING THEM FORTH and LET US, the great American public, HEAR THEM, so WE can decide FOR OURSELVES what this was all about.

Taping conversations without the FULL KNOWLEDGE and CONSENST of BTH Parties is against the law in many-if-not-all states.

Now, I happen to think this law is absurd, because who in his right mind would EVER say ANYTHING that might compromise himself were that law enforceable?

All interviews would have to be conducted in an open field, face-to-face both parties naked and fluoroscoped to make sure they were both "bug free."

At any rate, I am morally certain that the Bimbo or Bimbos on the phone must have been committed ideologues or paid employees (i.e. Political Prostitutes) of the anti-FOX, anti-Conservative, anti-Constitution, anti-Liberty, anti-American Left.

As such at the very least these Bimbos are guilty of ENTRAPMENT and BLACKMAIL.

I think you have to look at what's happening case by case first, then see if there's a whole and what it may be.

O'Reilly was let go because his advertisers fled. Here's a good piece on why: http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/bill-oreilly-fired-campaign-advertiser-deflections-color-of-change-1202390705/

O'Reilly was fired because of pressure on advertisers from groups like Color of Change and others who essentially shame the advertisers away from the shows. This is not the first time we've seen this sort of thing, and it's come from a variety of interests, often from the Right as well.

There is another reason why, also mentioned in that piece, and it has to do with Murdoch purchasing the rest of SKY Network over in Britain. The British have standards for network ownership that are higher than ours, which is saying extremely little for us, as the British allow for some pretty crazy stuff.

I completely believe pretty much all of what's been said and disclosed of O'Reilly and Ailes and the rest. It fits right in with them. O'Reilly, Miller, that horrid little punk Watters, these guys think they are like the old Rat Pack of yore, but they are a perverse mockery of it. They long for the mythical days when it was okay to slap a married woman on the ass at work, when success was defined as getting away with outrageous pomposity, ridicule and arbitrarily willed reality. These are low-class, low-brow people. "New Money" sorts who haven't a clue what honesty or class really mean.

And that gets to why Kelly and van Susteren left (only Hannity remains of the old FOX powerhouse primetime). They didn't want to be associated with it anymore. It was hurting their brands.

Beckel was sick, I believe, and Colmes backed-out years ago to a floating commentator job.

So, yes, there is pressure on FOX advertisers from some groups, but that's just part of the story. The story is the slobby culture and lack of ethics at FOX which should come as no surprise to anyone who's ever watched it.

I completely believe pretty much all of what's been said and disclosed of O'Reilly and Ailes and the rest. It fits right in with them. O'Reilly, Miller, that horrid little punk Watters ...

I think you ought to read Darren McGuffin's statement above. It pretty well reflects my own feelings on the subject, so of course, I'm going to like it, even though it's just as hard to prove as your opinions. ;-)

And that's pretty much ALL we have –– opinion, conjecture, and speculation fueled in the main by free-floating hostility looking for a "Cause" to latch onto in public forum where this basic animosity toward Life may express itself –– with force majeur.

I don't want to go into a long song and dance as to why I reject the entire realm of allegations that involve claims Sexual Harrassment, Child Rape, Date Rape, Marital Rape, Discrimination because of Race, Sex, Religion, Sexual Orientation, and all the other branches of VICTIMOLOGY that have given chronic ne'er-do-wells, vengeful spouses, rejected girlfriends, professional agitators, race baiters, blackmailers, cheap hustlers, looking for an easy buck, chimeric, overly ambitious public figures like Hillary Clinton, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Lizzie Warren avid to exploit and take advantage of any and every means available for self-promotion, self-aggrandizement, whether legitimate or not, and all manner of angry, lazy, self-pitying, good-for-nothing malcontents looking for ways to garner an easy ride through life at someone else's expense.

VICTOMOLOGY has given these undesirable elements a whole ARSENAL of WEAPONS that enable them to gain ILLEGITIMATE AVANTAGE through shrill, aggressive pursuit of VENGEANCE through the courts, in the court of public opinion, and through the flagrant use of BLACKMAIL.

O'Reilly and Ailes were reportedly churlish louts, but we must beware those who would seek to remedy such boorishness, are usually launching a stealth attack on nonconformity of though.

Beware the censorious moralists from all camps. First they employ persuasion; later, coercion and shaming; and finally, the violence of the state, or failing that, vigilante justice, including social media pogroms and threats to the nonconformist's livelihood.

So, yes, there is pressure on FOX advertisers from some groups, but that's just part of the story. The story is the slobby culture and lack of ethics at FOX which should come as no surprise to anyone who's ever watched it.____

I know this is about Bill O'Reilly and Fox but the question begs: Are you equally disturbed by the obvious at say CNN and , say Chris Cuomo, and his obvious anti-Trump bias day in and day out?

Should advertisers pull out of that show because of it's political bias? Or is bias only in the eye of the beholder?

Victim mentality is the nucleus of the FOX News universe. The irony is just too thick.

I've been around enough people like O'Reilly (in particular), Bill Cosby (who I have family connections to), these sorts of megalo-personalities, to know they get so full of themselves they think they can get away with anything. But it shouldn't take a certain upbringing to understand these kinds of people. Anyone with an average IQ and a reasonable education should find FOX News highly unethical, immoral, slutty, sleazy, unpleasant, negative, fear-mongering, and just plain stupid. What kind of person would you expect to work for FOX News?

This isn´t so much about O´Reilly as it is about Media Matters´ all-out war to destroy him with a targeted blitz of advertisers to cancel their ads for his show. This should be a lesson to all other conservative commentators and producers on exactly how the war against them will be conducted from now on.

They say, “This is not based on a momentary outrage; it’s an utraged response to a deep pattern of sexual harassment,”

Bullshit! If true, where was this outrage and blitz when Bill Clinton was having his bimbo eruptions –– ANY other indiscreet Democrat for that matter. This kind of thing ONLY happens to Republicans, and it happens over and over and over again.

Unless you took a ride on O'Reilly's dick while it was pumping in and out of one these vicious vaginas, and took your camera with you to record the scene, you have no proof at all that any of this stuff ever took place.

These days all rich, famous , powerful and attrative men are an easy mark for any conniving bitch willing to make accusations. Truth ain't got nuttin' to do with it, dearie. The femnazis have got it so well fixed in their favor that nowadays an accusation is as good as a conviction.

Who is killing fox news? Why was the arrogant prick O'Reilly unceremoniously defenestrated?

Quite simple, my dear boy. Rupert Moloch built an empire on right wing news delivered by big-tit blondes in short skirts showing plenty of leg. It was a sexist pig's wet dream, but the times have changed. Ailes and O'Reilly didn't get the memo, or more likely, thought they were bullet proof.

Rupert Moloch's inbred billionaire scions are progressives, and they will continue purging Fox of conservative elements, carefully balancing those exertions with ad revenue.

Spoken like the true, hard-bitten cynic you have become, Dicko –– though doubtless you'd prefer to think of yourself as a realist.

I'm sure you're right about the sons. Sharper than a serpent's tooth is a thankless, power-hungry spoiled rich kid. With two in the mix, decency probably doesn't stand a chance. Filial piety is a rare as hen's teeth –– especially these harsh, generally faithless times.

I heard the one son is a little less to the right than his dad, and the other a little more so, and that's the one with the wife who apparently is pretty progressive and has been putting on the pressure to be rid of O'Reilly for a while now. It wasn't just the sex stuff. It was the whole shtick. FOX just misinforms the public incessantly.

I've had FOX on in the background much of the day today. Just a little while ago, Jeanine Pirro, another complete loon I've read a bit about and have payed attention to over the course of her story in NY, said that what is happening at Berkeley, regarding these right wing provocateurs being invited to places like UC Berkeley and the ensuing riots and such, is happening all over the country! Everywhere!

She's a liar. She has that Gorka guy on now. Another loon. Another liar.

Jersey, just because you don't sympathize with a person's point of view does not mean they deserve to be called a "loon." Such silly loose talk is unbecoming to and unworthy of you. I want ALL of us to TONE DOWN the RHETORIC, stop calling each other names, and stop indulging in witless knee-jerk derogation.

WIKI on Sebatian Gorka:

Sebastian Gorka was born in London in 1970 to Zsuzsa and Pál Gorka, who fled to the United Kingdom from Hungary after the failed 1956 uprising. He attended St Benedict's School in west London, and received a lower second-class honours Bachelor of Arts degree in Philosophy and Theology from Heythrop College, of the University of London. At university, he joined the British Territorial Army reserves, serving for three years in the 22 Intelligence Company of the Intelligence and Security Group (Volunteers), an interrogation unit with a NATO role specializing in Russian and other languages supporting 1 (BR) Corps until the latter was disbanded in 1992 at the end of the Cold War.

In 1992 Gorka moved to Hungary, where he worked for the Hungarian Ministry of Defence while studying for a master's degree in international relations and diplomacy at the Budapest University of Economic Sciences and Public Administration (now known as the Corvinus University), which he completed in 1997. While finishing his degree he married American heiress Katharine Fairfax Cornell. In 1997, Gorka was a Partnership for Peace International Research Fellow at the NATO Defense College in Rome. Gorka was a Kokkalis Fellow at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University during the 1998–1999 academic year. ...

After returning to Hungary in 1998, Gorka served as an adviser to Viktor Orbán. In 2002, he entered into the PhD in political science at Corvinus University, completing his dissertation in 2007. Gorka is a naturalized American citizen.

Gorka worked in the Hungarian Ministry of Defense during the Prime Ministership of József Antall.

Following the September 11 attacks, Gorka became a public figure in Hungary as a television counterterrorism expert. This led to his being asked in 2002 to serve as an official expert on the parliamentary investigatory committee created to uncover the Communist background of the new Hungarian Prime Minister Péter Medgyessy. Medgyessy had been an undercover officer in the Secret Police, the organization which had maintained the previous dictatorship and helped crush the Hungarian Revolution of 1956.[21] Gorka rejected Medgyessy's claims of having not spied on people when he was a secret policeman. In the event, Gorka failed to obtain the necessary security clearance from the Constitution Protection Office to serve on the committee, apparently because he was widely regarded as a spy working for British counterintelligence. Gorka defended himself against the charge by saying his service in the British army was merely as a uniformed member of its counterterrorist unit, tasked with assessing threats from groups such as the IRA.

In 2004, Gorka became an adjunct to the faculty of the new US initiative for the Program for Terrorism and Security Studies (PTSS), a Defense Department-funded program based in the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany. At the same time Gorka became an adjunct to USSOCOM's Joint Special Operations University, MacDill Air Force Base. He and his family relocated to the United States in 2008. He was hired as administrative dean at the National Defense University, Fort McNair, Washington D.C. Two years later, he began to lecture part-time for the ASD(SOLIC)-funded Masters Program in Irregular Warfare and Counterterrorism as part of the Combating Terrorism Fellowship Program but remained in a largely administrative role. In 2014 Gorka assumed the privately-endowed Major General Horner Distinguished Chair of Military Theory at the Marine Corps University Foundation. In August 2016, he joined The Institute of World Politics, a private institution, on a full-time basis as Professor of Strategy and Irregular Warfare and Vice President for National Security Support. He is on the advisory board of the Council for Emerging National Security Affairs (CENSA).

Between 2009 and 2011 Gorka wrote for the Hudson Institute of New York (now Gatestone Institute). Between 2011 and 2013, Gorka was an adjunct faculty member at Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy. From 2014 to 2016, Gorka was an editor for National Security Affairs for the Breitbart News Network, where he worked for Stephen K. Bannon. ...

YOu said it Mr Freethinke. They have to puke out their hatred on everybody who disagrees with them.

Hey Jersey man! The leftwing street fascists did riot and do violence and Berkley and at that college on the east coast where they beat and dragged that poor female liberal professor and put her in a hospital.

you guys are thugs who go crazy when everybody doesn't agree with you. stick that in your ass and light it on fire!

Gorka is widely held to be a lunatic fringe guy, FT. This isn't just me. This is many professionals in his ostensible fields. On top of that, I do have working ears, be they what they may, and I can hear the craziness for myself. There is something deeply wrong with Gorka.

And Pirro regularly lies and lies and lies and lies, just as the rest of FOX. It's appalling so many people can't see it. We are truly not a very media savvy people.

Jersey, please stop. ALL you are doing with this line of loose chatter is revealing your OWN deeply entrenched biases.

If you do not yet understand how ARROGANT, BIGOTTED, ONE-SIDED, and openly INSULTING to the INTELLIGENCE of our citizens the old "standard" sources of News and Information are –– and have been since long before you were born ––, you are not being honest with yourself.

I have never thought, and certainly never claimed that FOX was a marvel of perfection, but at least it DID provide an alternative to the steady stream of Leftist Poopaganda gushing forth each day from the NYT, WAPO, BOGLO, LAT, CHICTRIB, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, and the old "news" magazines, Time, U.S. News & World Report, and Newsweek. To say nothing of lunatic leftist fringe publications like The Nation.

FOX has been moving steadily leftward for at least five years now, and with the present development outlined in this post appears to be eager now to join its Twisted Sisters listed above.

I'd say it is all about money. FOX ares not about conservatism. It started out filling a niche that they saw as being unfilled. FOX was never a good concept - mixing semi-conservatism with some seriously stupid people on the left like Alan Colmes - who could possibly watch that. I turned that s off a decade or more ago.

No woman should have to run a leering, groping gauntlet at work, endure having her ass pinched, breasts fondled, or her "pussy grabbed," as one boorish alpha-male put it.

Women in the workplace should not be made to endure sexual blandishments or sexual quid pro quos as a condition of employment.

Having established that, what do we make of a workplace where news women are encouraged to brandish their cleavage, legs and pretty pouty faces in the pursuit of ratings and more millions?

Who is exploiting who?

Equality in the workplace also entails not retreating to a legal safe space and suddenly laying claim to special kid glove status. Such mewling and cowering under the "weaker sex" umbrella makes all the more absurd the full-throated proclamations, "I am woman, hear me roar."

If a woman wants to compete with men, earn as much as men, and wield as much power as men, she must be as tough as men and resist the temptation to pleas special status when the waters get choppy.

Suck it up, sisters! If you want to run with the bulls, you can expect a horn up the ass every now and again. It is no different for men.

"News brings word that the SJW’s have bagged their biggest trophy to date. Bill O’Reilly is the most popular cable news talker in the business and he was just fired for making the girls cry. It is all part of what is looking like a well orchestrated effort to break Fox News on the wheel of political correctness. The screeching harpies knocked out Roger Ailes and now they have taken out the top star, all via the same method – powerskirts claiming to have been done wrong by the knuckle-dragging misogynists running the network.

"The claim will be that the advertisers demanded Fox fire O’Reilly, but that is complete nonsense. Cable channels, like Fox News, exist on subscription revenues, not advertising dollars.FNC gets $1.50 from every cable home each month. That’s roughly $1.8 billion a year whether people watch or not. Their ad revenue is less than a third of that number. In the case of ESPN, for example, ad revenue is around one billion, and they have an audience about ten times the size of a cable news operation, even Fox News."

"Goes on to say that this would dent Fox’s bottomline, but would not be compelling enough to cause them to drop an O’Reilly. No, Rupert was never a conservative and his kids are what this writer calls 'prog loonies.' Good read on 'The Demise of Fox News:'

"Even when conservatives are squeaky clean = a la Mitt Romney = the Left still manufactures high drama to blacken their reputations. We do the Left a big favor by not fighting back. Trump´s victory was due in large part to his willingness to fight back. It tirned oit to be a winning stance. Why are the pubbies in congress so weak and ineffective?

I wasn't a fan of O'Reilly. I typically did watch his opening memo, however, and sometimes the answer to his opening memo (often Charles Krauthammer). Unless a story or interview of particular interest to me followed, I switched channels until it was time for the Word of the Day.

O’Reilly, as obnoxious as he is, gave Trump a platform, credibility, exposure and a huge audience. He also kept some of the other Fox backstabbers on their toes through his top dog position.

I think LSM [lamestream media] got to the Murdoch’s through his pajama-boy sons and his new wife (ex-Jagger spouse)and pushed him to go against his instincts.

This will demolish Fox but also take away a key chip for Trump.

The question is will someone or something rise up to fill the gap and will it be in time? We’ve got almost 4 years but Bill-O’s ouster is a huge win for the left.

Look at what’s left.Perrino? Hates Trump

McCallum – same thing

Tucker – don’t trust him. There’s clearly no love lost between him and POTUS

The Five? Give me a break. Between Juan and Bob it’s hostile territory and won’t work at 9pm.

Baier? Despises Trump.

Shep? A fruitcake SJW neverTrumper.

So between 1 and 10 pm it’s a non-stop Trump bash.

I find it discouraging that O'Reilly was so precipitously ousted. Wasn't The O'Reilly Factor FNC's Number 1 show?

Tucker Carlson, O'Reilly's replacement, can be interesting and fearsome in his questioning, but I like him even less than I liked O'Reilly. I can't abide Carlson's quizzical look! It's mugging for the camera, IMO.

Clearly, Fox News is moving to the Left and, at the same time, in the direction of the establishment GOP. That move has been ongoing for some time now.

The Left never gives up. I do agree with the above posted comment that this is the opening salvo aimed at taking Trump down in 2020.

We're in for an ugly 3+ years of Trump bashing. The Dems will go nuttier than usual if Trump wins the 2020 National Election.

What else was Trump to do about Syria? He was damned if he did, and damned if he didn't!

Also anyone who thinks President Trump sought to profit from stock related to the manufacture of Tomahawk missiles by bombing an ISIS airfield in Syria has degenerated into a state of anger and hatred that is probably beyond the ability of mental help professionals.

FT, my problem with Trump now is that evaluating his actions in the context of his words used during the election campaign, we can discern that he's changed. There's a discrepancy between his words and actions regarding Russia and Syria. I would never have supported this sine that is exactly the lie that HRC used.

Something has changed regarding Trump. It would only be speculation to try to understand why it changed But it has changed and he's doing exactly what the deep state (The Neo-Con Sewer Rats) would want now.

Please be aware that we WILL NOT TOLERATE IRRELEVANT REMARKS, BOILERPLATE or PERSONAL INSULTS of ANY KIND, excpet those directed at Public Figures, and even there we reserve the right to monitor and reject the content if WE deem it idiotic or deliberately offensive.

I don't necessarily disagree with most of what O'Reilly has to say, but I find the way in which he says anything to be repugnant and bullish to the extreme.

Name me anyone on Fox that's not a downtime chucklehead, not the least of which those morons in the morning. I like Dennis Miller, but even he's a bit more over the top and sloppily indulgent than he used to be.

And yeah, overall the network has been slipping leftwards. I find them to be anything but unbalanced.

Gratuitous Displays of Extraneous Knowledge Offered Not To Shed Light Or Enhance the Discussion, But For The Primary Purpose Of Giving An Impression Of Superiority are obnoxiously SELF-AGGRANDIZING, and therefore, Subject to Removal at the Discretion of the Censor-in-Residence.